Site Mobile Navigation

Giuliani Stands His Ground on Abortion

ST. PETERSBURG, Fla. – Maybe it was Yankee stadium that brought out the combative New Yorker in former Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, but when he was asked about the treatment of his wife, Judith, by the press on Monday, he bluntly told reporters that they should back off and “show some decency.”

Three days into his tour and thousands of miles from the big city, Mr. Giuliani has been working on a gentler answer to questions about his personal life, which he is invariably asked about by reporters even though his wife did not appear with him at any of this week’s events.

In Des Moines Tuesday night, during his first foray in Iowa, he said that Christian leaders who have been critical of his being divorced twice are entitled to their opinion. Then he waxed philosophical, saying, “Nobody knows someone’s soul. Nobody knows the inner workings of someone’s life.”

Here this afternoon, he was asked again by a local reporter about the treatment of his wife – who has come under fire for working in the past for a company that killed dogs to test new products — and his comments at Yankee stadium.

The answer was even more elaborate this time.

“I’ll give you my rule of thumb,” he said. “I think personal life you look at from the point of view of job performance. How does it affect somebody? Otherwise, I think you are just kind of doing it for another reason. You are doing it because maybe it is titillating or interesting or whatever. So in my case, you are entitled to look into anything about me.”

But he said, most of the issues the press will examine about his personal life occurred while he was mayor, under tremendous pressure. Still, he said, he believed he was tremendously successful.

Many in the crowd of about 300 people gathered in the auditorium of St. Petersburg High School to hear him speak agreed with his own assessment of his performance.

Mr. Giuliani, in his prepared remarks, quipped that he meets more New Yorkers in Florida than in New York.

But the positions he staked out when he was mayor continued to threaten any inroads he hopes to make with more conservative voters.

In Tallahassee this morning, Mr. Giuliani was asked during an interview with CNN’s Dana Bash if he still believed whether abortion should be publicly financed, and said that he did.

“Ultimately, it’s a constitutional right, and therefore if it’s a constitutional right, ultimately, even if you do it on a state by state basis, you have to make sure people are protected,” he said.

“I’m in the same position now that I was 12 years ago when I ran for mayor — which is, personally opposed to abortion, don’t like it, hate it, would advise that woman to have an adoption rather than abortion,” he said. “But it is your choice, an individual right. You get to make that choice, and I don’t think society should be putting you in jail.”

Totally agree with Tom Goldkuhle and Sam so far, and maybe Rudy was opposed to abortion 12 years ago, but before that he definitely advised it to certain women… nudge nudge.

He’s wise not to campaign in NYC too much, since nearly everyone that was here during his strange and fascist reign doesn’t like him (except, I guess, those who greatly profitted by his actions).

And a side note to Republicans at large: when you terrorized us with the RNC big shebang, you brought fascism with you and transformed our mostly genial NYPD into Der Stasi. I think NYC would agree by more than 4 out of 5: NEVER hold your dumb convention here again. Hold your nine-eleven-nine-eleven we’ll save you from the terriers BS fest elsewhere.

Good For Rudy! As a life long Republican and former office holder, I am struggling to find a candidate to support. The first requirement is to be who you are and not play to the loud obnoxious minority and to rise above the fray, be thoughtful, listen to the people. I am still not convinced about Rudy but this is positive.

It’s ridiculous to bash Judith because the company she worked for killed dogs for testing. She was just a sales rep. I loathe the woman but this attack is pure nonsense.

I also loathe Giuliani but I must admit he is a shrewd politician. Giuliani has made a smart strategic move. When he was asked his position on abortion before, he said he would appoint strict constructionist judges to the Supreme Court, i.e. those who are anti-abortion like Scalia, Thomas and Roberts. Now that Romney has beated him in fundraising by appealing to the far-right (Giuliani knows he is toast with the conservatives) and now that he sees more moderate McCain floundering, Giuliani knows that he can get the most votes by appealing to the more moderate Republicans and getting the independent voters. Shrewd. Scarily, I almost find myself cheering for Romney.

Since when are Americans entitled to government funding of the exercise of their constitutional rights? Rudy seems to imply that such funding of abortion is not only desirable, but is needed to ensure the right. Were this “principle” applied more broadly, we should hear Rudy espousing government funding of firearms purchases, to ensure that citizens have the means to exercise their right to bear arms. How about government-funded travel vouchers, to help citizens peaceably assemble? Or, government funded attendance at nudie bars, to ensure the First Amendment right of lap dancing? When Rudy espouses selective “principles” that apply only to a single issue, he sounds like a left-wing Democrat, not a conservative Republican.

I am a pro-choice Republican but I have a really hard time going as far as Rudy. Just because something is a constitutional right does NOT mean that the state must promote it with tax dollars. The state should stay out of this choice all together, not give people a handout so that they can do it themselves. I don’t think even most of the Dems would go THIS far.

am a Democrat. I will vote for whoever the Dem candidate turns out to be, however HURRAH for Rudy for not pandering to the extreme base. I don’t think we will ever see him kiss Bush in the arm pit like one of is rivals! Could we have him as VP?!

Rudy’s position on abortion should do him in with the far right in the party. I do not think a Republican can get the nomination without them. From what I read, the far right is very important in the Republican primaries. Let’s hope the Republicans beat each other up.

I’d like to say this in response to those who don’t think abortion should be publicly funded. Giuliani, in saying that it should be, did not suggest that all constititutional rights should be paid for by the state. There is a significant difference between the right to abort and the right to bear arms or the right to assemble, because it is a health issue as well as a personal choice. There is a fee to have an abortion, which is not affordable to most of the women who seek them. State-funded health policies like Medicaid, do not cover the cost of abortion, so many women living in poverty who need or want abortions cannot afford to have them, or to take time off of work for at least two days, one for the discouraging “counseling” that is required in many states a full 24 hours before the actual procedure and at least one day off for the abortion itself. Also, 87% of counties in the US do not have an abortion provider and some states have as little as one provider in the entire state. Women in these states must travel for up to 6 hours in each direction, which adds to the cost, especially if they need to stay overnight because of a mandatory waiting period. Additionally, since abortion facilities are subject to more stringent licensing policies and much more expensive costs and taxes than any other medical service provider, it makes sense that some of the enormous profits the state makes off of abortion providers should rightfully go toward the cost of abortions for women who need the help. I’m not saying that the state should pay for travel costs, only that these costs should be taken into account when evaluating the cost to women, since they are a significant obstacle which the state uses to deny many women access to abortion services indirectly, yet effectively. What good is a constitutional right that can be nearly impossible for most people to exercise?

TO MODERATE MIKE: The point about abortion is simply that if the state stays out of it, the state IS imposing its choice on those women who cannot afford abortions. The difference between abortion and other rights (to bear arms etc), is that no one wakes up one morning with a gun suddenly attached to their hand. To ensure a level playing field, the state must fund abortions for those that can’t afford it themselves. Certainly, no one is arguing that the state can’t fund abortions that are necessary for medical reasons (for example those pregnancies that threaten the life of the mother, such as from preeclampsia or other conditions that regularly arise). So, your objections just applies to those women who chose not to bring to term a healthy fetus. The argument then is that the state can fund some abortions, but not others. This is the choice the state makes if, as you suggest, it does not fund abortions.

Giuliani’s postion on taxpayer-funded abortion will likely be, from this Republican-leaning view, his Achilles heel. It is one thing to support the penumbral Constitutional reasoning made famous in Rov v. Wade; it is another entirely to support the extension of such a policy onto the shoulders of taxpayers.

From a purely political perspective, a Republican candidate who mirrors the well-documented public opposition to tax-funded abortion is far more likely to prevail if contrasted against an Obama or a Clinton who stands against the broad popular view.

Nominating a candidate who supports taxpayer-funded abortion would be nothing short of suicidal for the Republican Party.

I am pro-choice. For Giuliani to be pro-choice as a Republican presidential contender should be the kiss of death for him. The Republican primary goers will have to overlook the fact that he is pro-choice, the Kerik problem, his position on greenhouse gases, his anti-gun stance, his pro-immigration stance and his scandalous personal life. That is an great deal of over looking to do. None of this is in line with ultra-conservative Christian conservative lunatics.

I don’t support using my tax money for women to get abortions. Legality is one thing and subsidy is another. If you’re too poor to pay for it, there are things called abstinence and contraception. I will allow government funding for in 2 instances (1) pregnancy from forcible rape; and (2) physical harm to the mother – but they need to be properly documented. Logistics of how that will be carried out, I have no idea, but I am tired of people failing to take responsibility for their own actions – it’s not like they woke up one day to find immaculate conception.

It is tragic how Rudy Giuliani’s personal view of abortion and his public position on it contradict each other.I hope and believe his public support of abortion rights will prevent him from receiving the Republican nomination for President.I have read the Constitution and there is not one word in it about the right to kill unborn children.I am not for putting women who obtain abortions in jail.But I am for jailing the murdering abortionists.They are the killers.

As a South Carolina resident, an Italian-American Catholic, and a staunch Republican I could not be more disappointed in Rudy’s recent double speak. To claim that you are pro-strict constructionist judges and then speak in favor of publicly funded abortions is ridiculous. Roe v. Wade is not based on any ‘constitutional right’ from a strict constructionist’s viewpoint. The abortion decision was justified on the IV amendment which regards private property. The IV amendment was interpreted to create a generalized penumbra power, ‘the right to privacy’. I think it is quite a judicial stretch to legalize abortions, much less publicly funded abortions around the “right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures…”.
If Giuliani truly believes in abortion rights he should not then say he supports strict construction of the Constitution. Roe v. Wade was decided by an extremely ACTIVE Supreme Court, in other words a court that legislated from the bench. I am sorry but I cannot support a candidate that says one thing and then contradicts it with another. I already suffered through 8 years of Clinton. My advice to Rudy is to rethink his constitutional theory or at least refrain from hypocrisy.

I don’t think he was advocating for public financing because it’s a constitutional right, I think he was just trying to say that since it’s a constitutional right he can’t do anything about funding for it. Which, of course, is wrong, but he wouldn’t be the first politician to say, the Supreme Court made me do it.

He is an opportunistic flip-flopper on abortion. When he was here in NYC, he said he fully supported a woman’s right to be in control of her body, and make her own decisions. As soon as he started campaigning, he talked about supporting the appointment of conservative judges who would overturn it. If he wants people to stay out of his personal life, perhaps he should consistently stay out of others’ bedrooms and personal decisions.

The other issue about the public funding of abortion is an interesting one. I do not like my tax money spent on killing people in other countries in mistaken wars, but I do not get a say in that at all. And if a woman knows she cannot mother this child, and is too poor to pay for her own abortion procedure, she is certainly too poor to raise, house, feed and educate that child, and we will be paying to house, feed, heal and educate that child with our tax money. That costs far more than the procedure.

President Obama drew criticism on Thursday when he said, “we don’t have a strategy yet,” for military action against ISIS in Syria. Lawmakers will weigh in on Mr. Obama’s comments on the Sunday shows.Read more…